https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388227 The AAAR Maharashtra ruled on a photography service provider's application regarding export of services on diamonds. The AAR had initially held that photography services performed on diamonds in Maharashtra constituted intra-state supply under Section 8(2) of IGST Act, 2017, as the service location and supplier were both in Maharashtra. The AAR further determined the supply did not qualify as zero-rated export under Section 2(6) of IGST Act since place of supply was not outside India and parties were establishments of the same distinct person. However, the AAAR ultimately held it lacked jurisdiction to determine place of supply questions, as such determinations fall outside the scope of advance ruling authority powers, rendering no ruling possible on the applicant's questions. en-us Wed, 03 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388227 The AAAR Maharashtra ruled on a photography service provider's application regarding export of services on diamonds. The AAR had initially held that photography services performed on diamonds in Maharashtra constituted intra-state supply under Section 8(2) of IGST Act, 2017, as the service location and supplier were both in Maharashtra. The AAR further determined the supply did not qualify as zero-rated export under Section 2(6) of IGST Act since place of supply was not outside India and parties were establishments of the same distinct person. However, the AAAR ultimately held it lacked jurisdiction to determine place of supply questions, as such determinations fall outside the scope of advance ruling authority powers, rendering no ruling possible on the applicant's questions. Case-Laws GST Wed, 03 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388227